Younger Yanks will choose playing abroad

Nope, you won't be waiting a long time. The fact of the matter is that my statement was OBVIOUS sarcasm. Your attempt to make it seem like I seriously tried to attribute those statements to you is the biggest "strawman" of this thread. I asked you what your solution was. And then I purposely and sarcastically stated an over the top proposition as a possibility. I suspect that since you don't have a solution, you've created the strawman of that statement in order to avoid actually ..... yanno ........ answering the question. But i've come to expect no less.

Anyway, i do enjoy the topic of this thread. And again, I am wholly for players moving to Europe to get proper compensation. I have no problem with it all. I am only arguing with a casually thrown proposition that I see all too often passed off as matter-of-fact truth. In the end, younger player will undoubtedly go to Europe primarily for the financial fruits, as they should. However, for there to be a true renaissance, we're still going to have to address the problem at the youth levels.

 

It may overvalue its players - all values are subjective - but if Josh Wolff was offered a million dollar salary by some mid-tier Bundesliga club, then MLS would have to talk Josh into staying by offering him a similar salary, adjusted for the cost of living and taxes ... and, when Josh did generate some interest from overseas, that's what MLS did - they are paying Josh $410K.

And that's where my problem with MLS is - that's where its best home-grown players (excluding Eddie Johnson and Landon Donovan) top out, in the $400K range.

That would make their pay an average salary in Eredivisie. That's as good a player as the entire US of A can produce.

And that's pretty effing sad.

Correct but why?

Certainly, it can't be distance. Argentina and Brazil are much further away from Europe than the US and yet those leagues are thoroughly scouted.

Why can't MLS be scouted as thoroughly?

My answer would be that it is. It's just that European scouts aren't impressed by what they see here.

My point was that MLS - and there are other culprits as well - does a piss-poor job raising the level of play of the American born and bred players to the high quality international level. Bobby Convey is hardly an exception to that notion. $1.3M is a miniscule amount by the world standards and Ryan Nelsen, only an honorary Yank, was a free transfer. When the Euro teams begin to splurge $3-5M per player on a regular basis - and returning to Josh Wolff example ... he may be overvalued by MLS but it's not like big clubs have been tempting the league with crazy offers to acquire Josh - then the league's worldwide standing and reputation would improve. Currently however, it's in the crapper.

Of course, the attack is the US's weakest part of the game and the reason some, but not all, of these palyers are in MLS is because they are not wanted by bigger clubs and/bigger leagues.

I mean, four shots on goal is not the type of a credential that MLS should present in transfer talks. (and yes, a lot of it was Arena's fault) Dempsey at least showed heart, if not sublime skill, while Donovan showed up for one out of three games.

Once again, not very impressive.

One can't argue hypotheticals here ... I could however speculate - without any proof, mind you - that if Claudio went to Argentina at the age of 18, he'd not have to go to Bayer as a free transfer and wait until his mid-20s to begin getting decent PT with some very weak Bundesliga squads (Leverkusen went places when Daum was appointed and Reyna played in only five matches during the 95-96 season, then was sold to the newly promoted Wolfsburg where he got a lot of time the following year). I think Claudio's talents, if properly brought up all along, would have had him in a good league with a good team way before he went to the Rangers.

But we'll never know the "what ifs" of individual stories and careers but looking at the grand picture of what has taken place prior to now allows us to make general summaries of the situation.

And, in my opinion, the general situation in MLS is very bleak.

 

I'm going to admit that i just don't understand your first point. If you are only comparing players who are already out of MLS and in Europe, why would you have made transfer fees an issue to begin with. Remember, you agreed with a poster who was using transfer fees as an indicator of what Europe had done for them (ie the European players were getting higher transfers than MLS players). I'm missing something, but it's neither here nor there.

As for the 2nd point, again Rommul, it's apples and oranges. Beasley and Farfan are 2 players who START FOR THEIR NATIONAL TEAMS. Spector is not. Spector is a guy with tons of reserve experience and now a half season of ball at a lower-mid table team. But again, Farfan and Beasley were starters on their national teams. If Beasley and Farfan were 2 players quietly toiling in their home leagues, you'd have a great point ...... but they weren't. Beasley, Farfan and Spector were not in remotely similar positions at the times of their transfers.

 

It was a rhetorical question that you didn't want answered because you wanted to put words in people mouths (especially since I have never come out in favor of the send all the kids to europe idea). You were trying to draw attention away from the thread topic (and you accomplished it very well)

Really? Have stated on many occasions that MLS needs to spend less money on big money players and invest more in real youth development. Funny how you were able to cite my so called "MLS sucks" stance from other threads yet seemed to (accidentally we are all sure :rollseyes my stance on this issue.

Yeah I have never offered any solutions. :rollseyes:

Translation: When in doubt yell "No I am not the one doing it you are!"

Thats twice now you have attempted to turn words around.

Now this thread isn't even about an interesting topic anymore.

What a waste. I guess congratulations should be in order.

 

Fine then thats a caveat (another caveat) that makes it even less clear cut as being simply "the players in the system will be valued more highly than players outside it"

Its not as clear as you make it.

 

Funny, especially coming from a person who started the contact between the two of us by trying to state that I was for MLS stagnating due to MLS being the best option still. Then when i denied that, you restated the same position. Of course, all the while, I'd never stated that. Now, you've suddenly become righteous after I called you on it, and you think you have the high ground. Sure buddy. Keep on trying. If you had been so interested about the interesting topic, you would have come at my initial post in a constructive way. However you chose not to.

 

No, it's not a caveat at all. I stated from the beginning that two players who are both "5's" on a scale of 1-10 would be treated differently depending on where they are based. go back and read my post. I'm sorry to tell you this, but at the time of the transfers of Beasley, Farfan and Spector, they were not all on the same level. If you think that Beasley (starter for the US and WC veteran) and Farfan (starter for his country) were similarly situated with Spector ........ well, I don't know what to tell you. The fact is that I made that distinction from the beginning though, and you just chose to ignore it, because it didn't jive with your point.

 

Agreed. Its my fault you chose to put words in people's mouths and bring in material from other threads.

Moving on

I am not sure I agree with this particualr point. Its probably a minor quibble.

But I don't think we can really draw these kinds of conclusions so clearly with the system as it is now.

A Josh Wolff would probably be making a lot more coin now if he had moved earlier. We forget because it was so long ago but he was a pretty dynamic (not just fast) player when he got the big contract. After the injury he became a much savier player. I think if he had gone overseas he may have put these two elements together at a much younger age and would be now looking at a final european contract similar to what Mcbride is getting (not saying he would be in the prem).

That version of Josh Wolff would reflect very well on MLS's ability to devlop players.

Furthermore if we had deeper/more professional rosters with more players pushing themselves for places players like Martino and Convey and Mapp, who remained unchallendged for positions, might have seen their development accelerated simply because of the higher pressure environment where a lot of coasting we see wouldn't be so easy to get away with.

Those players would reflect very well on MLS development as well.

This is why I don't think raising the cap or spending on marquee players is the immediate step we need to take in order to move the league forward. The strutucre has to change to achieve the results we want.

At any rate I agree with your comments about the talent being produced. I just think that it very easily be quite different.

 

It's just fun to stretch your wings every once in a while. I'll back off now. Thanks for indulging me. As for you Rommul ........ no hard feelings. I vehemently disagree with some of your conclusions, but that's life.

 

Oh I don't pretend to be blameless (hence the I am a loudmouth on a message board crack).

 

\

You said two players who were both "5" would be treated differently based on where they were born.

You were comparing players born in England to MLS players not Americans to Americans.

And frankly Beasely being a national teamer is not the the large issue you make it out to be. PSV piad 2.5 million for a player with no experience in europe, West Ham paid what they paid for Spector who had Chapmions League experience and is a proven quantity in the prem.

Its not as if americans are going to get transfered based on reputation. They get transfered based on what the suitor thinks they are worth.

West Ham ( a prem side and a big club) got Spector for less than a mil.

Reading (a small Championship side) spent a similar price (maybe a bit more) for Convey.

Thats an example using the method outlined in this lastest post about where players are based.

Why didn't Spector "garner a MUCH larger transfer in Europe than an MLS'er who is also a 5 on the same scale."?

An argument could even be made that Convey is worse than Spector.

It simply much more nuanced than you make it out to be.

 

Ok, I had to come back for this. You are telling me that the limited time that Spector got in the Champions League (how much time was it again), trumps the fact that Beasley was a first choice starter and WC veteran for the US? C'mon man. Please don't go down that road. Spector playing about 1/2 season worth of prem games last year (if that) and his extremely limited CL experience simply does not compare to the resume that Beasley had. To say that his national team games are not a large issue is a stretch of epic proportions, because you and I both know that if he hadn't been a WC veteran/US starter, he wouldn't have gotten an offer for the 2.5 he went for (or whatever it was). Spector simply is NOT "proven" at this point. And again, I cleared up my statement to address the differences between players who are already in Europe against those who are trying to get there, as well as those who actually were born and did there training there vs those who did not.

 

Didn't say that. One quantity was known one wasn't.

He got the offer of 2.5 because MLS held out for more money.

That was not the original offer.

Dollar figures are about a lot more than player ability.

Farfan was cheaper than Beasely simply because his team was much more motivated to sell than MLS was despite the fact that he was clearly the more talented player.

Its just not as simple as you make it out to be.

Of course he is proven. The same way John Terry is proven the same way Zat Knight is proven the same Arjen Robben is proven the same way Kieran Richardson is proven.

All players at different parts of the spectrum who clubs know what they are getting when they buy them.

The guy is proven. Good or bad is immaterial. They are all known quantities.

Does this address the situation with Convey and Spectors fees?

 

NO ONE was extremely impressive. And if LD IS our best player, his performance was even less impressive. And, of course, the issue is not how good LD is, it is how good LD COULD BE if he had gone elsewhere. I don't pretend to know, but I also doubt that without MLSS the guys you mention would not have found very similar gigs in very similar leagues. McHead (and Maisoneuve and Deering I think) were already in the B2 in '96. LD obviously could have played in the B1. I can't imagine Convey. Dempsy and DMB would not have ended up in the Dutch 2nd div or France or Belgium or wherever. I really think we have no idea what all that would have done to their development. I, for one, would have been very sad not to have had a place to sit in the sun and drink 10 buck beers every other Saturday, but to suggest that our elite guys wouldn't have gotten any game without MLS is stretching it I think. Now, what the effect of fielding an Australian/Irish/Candian-esque mishmash of top tier players and D2ers would have had on our WC squad would have been, we will never know.

 

Josh Wolff is an unproven player. That's the way it will always be until MLS starts proving they can sell top quality World Class players. He was only marginal at the international level.

An unknown player moving to the major European leagues (England, Spain, Italy, Germany, Holland) do not command large transfer fees or large salaries when moving from the smaller tier leagues (MLS, Scandanavia, Africa, Asia)

If Wolff would move to Bundesliga, have two quality seasons, he'd be in position to demand a VERY large salary.

Because of the reputation of so many American players flaming out in Germany, they are not going to offer large salaries to any American until they can prove they can adjust to the Bundesliga style and succeed (Tony Sanneh signed for 900,000 euro ($1.1 million/year) when he left Hertha for Nurnberg!)

 

You know.... I often get myself involved, but it's kind of nice to sit out of one of these discussions/debates/arguments and just read along and smile at the back and forth.

 

Well, we can look at those who went the Euro route: Beerholder, Gibbs, Stewart, Reyna, O'Brien, Gooch, Russel, Pearce, Dolo, Casey, etc.

All have bounced and bobbed a bit - Beerholder from Dutch D2, Nationwide, Bund1 and 2 - which, frankly is just about his level: very good second division player just lacking a few little gifts (foot speed, foot speed, fastness of foot) that would make him a "top notch" (not to be confused with "world class" or "all star"). Gibbs is now going to EPL after B1, 2, 3, MLS, Ered good, Ered crap. Boca is in the same boat after MLS, EPL.

Again, I love MLS, I think it has really helped our second tier players: the guys below McBride/Mathis/Wolff/DmB quality, but even decent Canadians finds ways to get game. And in some cases, I think, the added pressure of having to really get out and make a team might have helped a few of these players.

Even at the National Team level, MLS has produced or discovered few impact players that would not have had a chance elsewhere. (ie. were not already on the international radar from U-comps.)

 

Two points here -
A) Money is a great equalizer and there's a virtually unrestricted world market for soccer players with virtually unlimited buyers and sellers. If the market values a certain player at a certain price, then it's a collective summary of many individual judgements. It's not Sidefootsitter's price/value/judgement, it's the one of every general manager from Thames to Volga.

B) My subjective opinion on the physical talent that goes into the league is that it's sufficient to produce several mid-tier (~ $3-8M) transfers per year. To me, Brian Ching, Edson Buddle, Brian Mullan, Clint Dempsey and many others should be in much demand by the mid-tier Euro clubs. What explains the lack of this demand is that these players are not accomplished in the skills department and the prevailing attitude among the Euro scouts is that if a player isn't technically polished by the time he is in his 20s, he'll never exceed that level.

I happen to think they are wrong - Brian Ching was in the A-league when the last World Cup rolled around - but understand that they're afraid to be buying blind. No one knows which 26-year old player will get better and which will remain tactically and technically inferior.

It's somewhat of a reinforced bias. If MLS transfers begin setting Europe on fire, then the league will probably receive more interest. If the transfers are of extremely limited success, then the interest will be lukewarm.

MLS is partially to blame and BMB and Nelsen are just too few and far in between at this point to change people's opinions about the US soccer.

The count for the US players making a significant contribution to mid-level and higher Euro teams is pretty small - an often-injured Reyna at a disappointing ManCity, an aging BMB at a nearly relegated Fulham, a decent Steve Cherundolo at a mediocre Hannover and that's about it (for our field players).

There's no one currently on the level of Reyna and JOB of the 2,002 era - solid contributors on the CL quality sides. There are a lot of promising prospects to be sure but who knows what'll happen to Onyewu, Gibbs, Nguyen, Spector, Convey, Bradley, Feilhaber, et al. As the WC showed, these players were not ready to excel at the highest level yet.

Some YAs (Reyna, McBride, Lewis) are clearly past their prime, others (Convey, Onyewu) are still waiting to hit their peak. Still others like Beasley and Bocanegra will probably be average players at best and would need to be given limited responsibilities on the pitch - i.e., no more right-mid for Beasley or left wingback/halfback for Bocanegra.

And, of course, I disagree on Donovan since he makes Jim Everett look like Brett Favre.

And my disagreement with you is that the league doesn't successfully convert the available raw talent into the polished performers as nearly as well as you think. It can do so much better.

 

But thats really not the point of MLS though, is it? The point of MLS is to create a professional infastructure for American players that helps as many guys as possible get actual playing time and be evaluated much more thoroughly and effectively because they're playing as professionals in a professional league. I agree that it doesen't take a great domestic league to have a great national team (look at Sweden) but I don't think too many people are sitting around MLS headquarters going "crap...why havent we produced a ronaldo yet?" I dont think it's about that level of accomplishment, it's about helping the overall mass of quality in this country, inclding not just players but coaches and referees and executives and everyone else...which it has undoubtedly done, IMO, and why I also believe that it deosent matter if MLS becomes a top world league, as long as it survives and grows, it WILL have a positive impact, how can it not.

 

Yeah, absolutely dead on. I agree completely with this. The more professional environment you have all the way around, the better. But I think the real impact of this is still a couple of years away. Kids born in the "MLS Era" are just now playing U-10. At my local AYSO most of the coach still aren't "real" (read "growing up playing") soccer players. etc etc.

There are a few USMNT players in the last 3 "post MLS" World Cups whos fortunes were materially affected (for good or bad - you make the call) by MLS. Heydude likely would not have gotten his BL chance if he had not had MLS to show his stuff (I'm just guessing here - I actually don't remember how Heydude was rated as a youth player.) Agoos likely would not still have been in the mix come '02 if he had been forced to ply his trade at Chiasso or St. Mirren. (I think that puts us 1- 1 at JK - you decided which.)

Again, I am in now way anti-MLS. I bought season tix the first year, took my daughter to her first game at 6 months old etc. etc. I just think the affect on the "early generation" was likely minimal at best.

Down the road, it could change things quite a bit.

 

Disagree ... when it comes to realistic discussion, the issue is the full range of possibilities for LD in Europe, including how good he could be but also including scenarios where he doesn't fit in, or gets benched, or gets injured through overwork.

No, McBride only lasted one season in B2. in 1995 he played in the USISL, and so did Brian Maisonneuve. Despite being only a semipro version of today's PDL, that league did pretty well for young players, especially unknowns like Sanneh and Armas. As you've suggested, when it comes to development, the standard of play isn't always the chief issue.

 

Depending on what you mean by "impact players," I'm not sure I agree. After all, in pre-MLS days it was exceedingly rare for a player to line up a job abroad based solely on performance as youth internationals. Berhalter did it, and Reyna probably could have, but very few others did.